Aaaahhh!!! Zombie--you're channeling me. I feel like I've been transported into some kind of parallel universe. :lol:
+1, by the way, for your comments on Grant. He's got to be more talented than his detractors make out if he's been racking up 1200+ yds each year.
"zombieslayer" wrote:
Macbob - You're new here. I'm actually an amateur writer and one of my writing tools I use is exaggeration for effect. Like when I said "screw the run," I'm fully aware we still need to run the ball against teams like the Giants and even someone like the Pats who are the NFL's worst at defending the pass, we still need to run 20% of the time.
We also occasionally need to run to soften up the DL and to help chew up clock time.
It's an exaggeration. I hoped I made it obvious.
Then I became even more pro-pass when everyone became doom & gloom about our lack of running game. I don't like doom & gloom. Accomplishes nothing. So I found teams that won SBs with crappy running games and cited them.
As for Grant, I've always been a Grant fan and was defending him heavily last year when people were saying he's "boring" and all the other stuff they were calling him. The guy does nothing but produce. He gives the D a breather as he continually gets 4+ yards a run and helps keep the O on the field.
I'm hoping Starks can be like a Grant-lite.
wtf does does 2005 have to do with Starks debut?
"macbob" wrote:
You completely missed what Porky said then. I was responding to him about depth. He said that 2010 showed you can never have too much depth at RB. I said we already learned that in 2005.
"Zero2Cool" wrote: